lancehedrick from australia what a niche costs ha!

Bought mine direct from UK to Australia for AU$1,000 landed over a year ago. But yes, if you want it tomorrow and buy from an Australian retailer like AlternativeBrewing then expect to pay AU$1,800. But I suspect that may be less to do with taxes, that’s more to do with a standard retailer mark up.

    InfamousTuba I just want more robust testing on the hypothesis, a very small sample size of tests on flats versus conicals is not enough data for me.

    Background — I have a lot of experience with clinical trials from the day job, having enrolled lots of patients on clinical trials, and on the other end designing, running, and analyzing the data from clinical trials.

    My takeaway from this study is that there seems to be no difference between conical and flat burrs in a blind tasting situation. If this is the case, it’s unlikely that redoing this test with larger numbers will produce a different result.

    It is far more common for a positive result (there is a difference between conical and flat burrs) with small numbers to change to a negative result when done with a larger sample size than it is for a negative result with small numbers to turn positive when it’s done with a larger sample size.

        wilburpan I agree, I don’t think I would expect the result to change all that much. However, there are a good number of changes between their protocol and a more robust one that I would implement, which I have outlined. Coming from a neuroscience standpoint with a good amount of experience designing and critiquing methodology for experiments, the testing and ‘pseudoscience’ surrounding a lot of coffee, especially in regard to equipment and grinders is frustrating. Trying to find good data on burr geometries, grind size analysis and even different pour-over brewers is not always that easy but companies and people in the industry still say that one product performs better than another without presenting data.

        Once the Christmas rush has passed and the product development I am doing has finished I would like to design some experiments on different grinders, different burrs and different equipment. I think it would be fun to pit some of things against each other in a lab environment and see if what some of the coffee community says holds up under examination

        Coffee Roaster. Home: Sage Dual Boiler, Niche Zero, Ode v2 (SSP), 1zpresso ZP6 Work: Eagle One Prima EXP, mahlkonig e80s, Mazzer Philos and lots more

            InfamousTuba …even different pour-over brewers is not always that easy but companies and people in the industry still say that one product performs better than another without presenting data.

            If this happened, then there would be data, the fact that there isn’t tends to speak for itself (assuming we’re talking about the commonly used brewers like V60, Chemex, Kalita Wave, Melitta etc. the only differences I have found are the speed you need to pour the water to get the same extraction from one to the next, the effect of different papers in the same brewer on flow & suitability vs brew size…other than that, they do the same thing when dialled in)

                MWJB exactly the conclusion I came to, a lot of claims are made about products and I’m sure companies must spend a lot of time testing a product against competitors. Some brewers are nicer to use than others, but as far as taste goes I don’t see any differences in most of them

                Coffee Roaster. Home: Sage Dual Boiler, Niche Zero, Ode v2 (SSP), 1zpresso ZP6 Work: Eagle One Prima EXP, mahlkonig e80s, Mazzer Philos and lots more

                    InfamousTuba exactly the conclusion I came to, a lot of claims are made about products and I’m sure companies must spend a lot of time testing a product against competitors. Some brewers are nicer to use than others, but as far as taste goes I don’t see any differences in most of them

                    But therein lies a large pitfall.

                    Surely, for any exercise in which we treat data gathering as King, it needs to be measuring something that’s objectively measurable? How coffee tastes isn’t. Some, for instance, burr geometries and the resulting consistency of grinds no doubt are measurable, but the taste resulting fron using them? That’s much more subjective.

                    And as you point out, you don’t see (taste) a difference in most of them, and nor do I, but neither of us can tell what someone else can taste because none of us can experience the other’s taste buds.

                    I’ve related a story before, I think, where a friend swore he could tell if I’d made his tea using a spoon that had stirred my coffee. I thought he was winding me up. We used to have a couple of gaming sessions a week, so for about 6 months I very carefully either did his tea first, or washed the spoon I’d used for (instant) cffee before stirring his tea.

                    Having not had him comment/complain about a coffee taste in this tea, for that 6 months, I conducted an experiment. I made my coffee, washed and dried the spoon, dipped it ONCE in my coffee, shook off any loose coffee from the spoon and stirred his tea maybe two rotations.

                    I said nothing and gave him his cup, sat down and prepared to pay (racing MotoGP bikes I think), and he took a sip of tea. He immediately said You used the coffee spoon in my tea, didn’t you?". The kitchen isn’t even on the same floor as where we were gaming and there’s no way he can have known. It can only be that he could taste the tihy bit of remaining coffee in the whole cup of tea. I certainly can’t. I didn’t believe he could either, and thought he was winding me up.

                    When he can taste that, and I can’t, and I doubt many could, I can only conclude there’s a big difference between his sense of taste, and certainly it’s sensitivity, to mine. How can we objectively determine what tastes better?I mean, maybe 1000 people not being able to taste that coffee ‘taint’ doesn’t mean he can’t. I might genuinely prefer a V60 to a Clever, or whatever, but it doesn’t invalidate it if someone else prefers the Clever. Similarly, I love coffee but can’t stand coffee cake. My brother loves coffee cake, but can’t stand my favourite, a nice fruitcake. Who’s taste is ‘wrong’? Neither, of course.

                    So the elephant in the room …. we can break burr geometry down all we like, and examine consistency of grounds sizing but how can we coherently categorise which tastes best? Or more specifically, to whom?

                    We might get 999 out of 1000 prefer version A to be, but I (or you) might be the 1000th person that doesn’t.

                    My objective, and I assume every here to, has taste as ther No.1 priority. Data analysis only gets us so far. It might point us at a probability of tasting better, but only one method will be certaon - taste it for ourselves. And it’s frustrating as hell. 😀

                        I think it can be hard to just think about it as being so subjective. Everyone has different preferences and I think to categorically saying one thing is better than the other doesn’t really work. I mean almost everyone would say that a cheap hario hand grinder doesn’t make as good a coffee as a commandante or a kafatek flat max. But how far can it go, is a 98mm burr that much better for everyone than a 64mm burr. How many people can even spot the difference?

                        I think people just want some way of knowing what is best for them without having to buy or try so many types of equipment. I am lucky to get to try a large amount of machines and grinders to help form an opinion but not everyone has that possibilty

                        Coffee Roaster. Home: Sage Dual Boiler, Niche Zero, Ode v2 (SSP), 1zpresso ZP6 Work: Eagle One Prima EXP, mahlkonig e80s, Mazzer Philos and lots more

                        We know by now that the only true and indisputable source of coffee data isn’t research, trials or testing.

                        It’s what James Hoffman says.

                          Hi Lance, been a fan of your videos ever since you put up the latte art tutorials, they really improved my latte art a lot! I still go back to them from time to time to remind myself of certain techniques. I will say, as someone who watches a lot of your videos you do tend to use 50 words when 10 will often do, but I think you know this and have referenced it in some of your earlier videos. One big issue I have with a lot of “influencer” videos especially when it comes to grinder reviews is the grinder not actually being shown grinding! That’s insane to me. I want to see and hear the grinder chomping through beans, it blows my mind that so many videos don’t just go through their typical work flow with each new machine / grinder so we get a much better idea of said machine rather than just looking at glossy camera angles.

                          CoffeePhilE Surely, for any exercise in which we treat data gathering as King, it needs to be measuring something that’s objectively measurable? How coffee tastes isn’t. Some, for instance, burr geometries and the resulting consistency of grinds no doubt are measurable, but the taste resulting fron using them? That’s much more subjective.

                          I’ve worked on clinical trials where we look at lots of things that are subjective, like quality of life issues, or how much pain someone feels as part of their disease. It’s possible to answer questions based on these things.

                          Similarly, it’s possible to measure how things might affect the taste of coffee. It might be difficult to design an experiment that would do so, but it’s still possible.